For the record, it was the day before that when I tried to submit HTML5, and Al Haines refused it, just as I said PG refuses HTML5 -- so I don't see where the controvery is? And since, as I said previously, the new Amazon tools expect HTML5, so that won't be helping us submitters any. It presumably could help Marcello, who can target HTML5 as the output of his HTML Epubmaker rewrite tools, where hopefully he can now turn off some of the other rewriting "workarounds" he has been doing to target MOBI. The new tools would make it a lot easier for submitters who are writing (sensible) HTML intended to actually target EPUB and MOBI to have a better chance of "just" targeting EPUB and then getting MOBI "for free." Or is Marcello going to insist on staying with the old crusty version of kindlegen as well? If someone, like I did, now downgrades their HTML5 to 4 in order to get PG to accept it, then what? Do "we"/I keep a copy of my HTML5 version in hand, and then do a hypothetical merge on the then-current PG version when PG gets around to it to actually accepting HTML5? Or presumably PG will refuse to do that, and continue their current policy of defending to the death old crusty versions of HTML of otherwise great books which, because they are old crusty versions, really don't do anyone any good any more? And presumably this means the "real" development path for people who actually care about creating HTML that real people can read on real machines is that we get to write in HTML5, try that HTML5 out on real machines using EPUB and MOBI compilers (like kindlegen) and then once we have working HTML5 then we get to hack it back down to 4 to submit it to PG, and then we get to hack it back down yet again, to turn it into PG txt72. ??? Al> For the record, it was only this afternoon that it was made quite clear to him, by myself and Greg Newby, that PG will probably eventually accept HTML5 files, but not, repeat Not, repeat NOT (my emphasis), until it becomes a W3C Recommendation (it's currently a W3C Working Draft, subject to change), and the W3C validator accepts HTML5 files without errors or warnings. [The W3C issued warnings about old browser compatibility because I included a BOM as a file transfer courtesy to PG, since I have no idea what kind of computer nor tools they process their files with. I would have thought that PG would have just stripped the BOM if they don't like BOMs] What Jim Said>As input format they accept HTML5 and CSS3, not that that will help us submitters because PG refuses to accept HTML5. Hopefully PG will at least pick up the new version of kindlegen so they can turn back off some of the Marcello file rewriting.